The Obama administration told Congress that if the Supreme Court ruled to cut off health insurance subsidies it would be in a position to help low income and moderate income Americans.
Sylvia Mathews Burwell, the secretary of health and human services, said a court decision against the administration would do "massive damage" that could not be undone by executive action. This put pressure on the court to rule in favor of the administration. In case the court strikes down subsidies - it will cause a lot of hardship to lower income people and confusion in the insurance market all over the country. The court is scheduled to hear arguments in the case on March 4.
Reliance on Emergency Rooms Increases With Affordable Care Act
Healthcare insurance was provided to an estimated 20 million Americans who lacked coverage, by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Advertisement
After initially brushing aside the lawsuit as frivolous, federal health officials have in recent months begun to take it seriously, fearing that it could upend the health care law and jeopardize coverage for millions of people who could not afford insurance without subsidies.
Republicans in Congress have repetitively asked the administration how it would react if the court agreed with the plaintiffs.
In response on Tuesday, Ms. Burwell said, "We know of no administrative actions that could, and therefore we have no plans that would, undo the massive damage to our health care system that would be caused by an adverse decision." Ms. Burwell has refused to answer such questions in the past, saying she was focused on increasing the number of people who signed up for coverage in the open enrollment period, which ended Feb. 15.
![Affordable Care Act Rolled Out in Kentucky]( "Affordable Care Act Rolled Out in Kentucky")
After its passage, the Affordable Care Act in Kentucky has brought a sea change in health care.
Ms. Burwell was pessimistic of what would happen if the court ruled against her. "Millions of people would lose their health insurance subsidies and therefore would no longer be able to afford health insurance," she said. "Second, without tax subsidies, healthy individuals would be far less likely to purchase health insurance, leaving a disproportionate number of sick individuals in the individual insurance market, which would raise the costs for everyone else."
The health care law offered subsidies, in the form of tax credits, to low- and moderate-income people who buy insurance through "an exchange established by the state."
The plaintiffs and their lawyer, Michael A. Carvin, argued that Congress gave states an incentive to establish their own exchanges, but that the Internal Revenue Service eliminated that incentive by allowing the tax credits in all states.
"Had the I.R.S. from the start made clear that subsidies were limited to state exchanges, states would not have overwhelmingly refused to establish them," Mr. Carvin told the court in a brief filed last week.
Source: Robert Pear
Source: Medindia
In response on Tuesday, Ms. Burwell said, "We know of no administrative actions that could, and therefore we have no plans that would, undo the massive damage to our health care system that would be caused by an adverse decision." Ms. Burwell has refused to answer such questions in the past, saying she was focused on increasing the number of people who signed up for coverage in the open enrollment period, which ended Feb. 15.
Affordable Care Act Rolled Out in Kentucky
After its passage, the Affordable Care Act in Kentucky has brought a sea change in health care.
Advertisement
Ms. Burwell was pessimistic of what would happen if the court ruled against her. "Millions of people would lose their health insurance subsidies and therefore would no longer be able to afford health insurance," she said. "Second, without tax subsidies, healthy individuals would be far less likely to purchase health insurance, leaving a disproportionate number of sick individuals in the individual insurance market, which would raise the costs for everyone else."
The health care law offered subsidies, in the form of tax credits, to low- and moderate-income people who buy insurance through "an exchange established by the state."
The plaintiffs and their lawyer, Michael A. Carvin, argued that Congress gave states an incentive to establish their own exchanges, but that the Internal Revenue Service eliminated that incentive by allowing the tax credits in all states.
"Had the I.R.S. from the start made clear that subsidies were limited to state exchanges, states would not have overwhelmingly refused to establish them," Mr. Carvin told the court in a brief filed last week.
Source: Robert Pear
Source: Medindia
Muskegon and Oceana Counties Enroll More Than 4000 Residents in Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Plans
Many residents of the Muskegon and Oceana Counties got covered under the Affordable Care Act plans during thelast enrollment period and expected better results during this year's enrollment.
Advertisement
 Affordable Care Act's Contraceptive Coverage can be Beneficial to WomenAffordable Care Act's mandate for contraceptive coverage could be immensely beneficial to women, suggest Penn State College of Medicine researchers. | Advertisement
|
Advertisement
Recommended Reading
Latest Health Insurance News
Medicare beneficiaries face challenges when accessing contraceptive or birth control care, especially long-acting birth control methods.
Medicaid expansion improves access to care and addresses health gaps in the 11 states that have opted against Medicaid expansion.
: Is Medicare beneficiary to oral health? Following enrollment, traditional Medicare and Advantage beneficiaries used fewer dental services.
A third of women with pregnancy coverage through Medicaid — are uninsured before or after pregnancy, says study.
Young adults with breast cancer and stage IV cancers had pronounced improvements attributable to the US' Affordable Care Act (ACA)-expanded Medicaid.